1. The Parliamentary Assembly is concerned that, at present, momentous political challenges, both within and outside Europe’s borders, are threatening the continent and its unity: the daily risk of terrorist attacks, the rise of Euroscepticism, nationalism, populism and xenophobia, the persistence of frozen and open conflicts, the annexation or occupation of a neighbour’s territories, the prolongation of state of emergency measures and the re-emergence of divisions. Wars at the doors of Europe threaten the security of the continent and have caused massive refugee and migratory flows.

2. The efficiency and authority of the unique human rights protection system, based on the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5), are threatened by various attempts to undermine the authority of the European Court of Human Rights, by the lack of political will on the part of certain States Parties to implement its judgments, despite their legally binding force, or by delays in their implementation.

3. Recent developments within the European Union, including ongoing infringement and rule of law procedures against some of its member States, the lack of solidarity in the handling of the refugee and migratory crisis, as well as the decision by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union, also present challenges for the Council of Europe, as it offers a unique forum of co-operation between European States which are members of the European Union and those which are not.

4. Against this background, the Assembly believes that the Council of Europe and the values it upholds are today more necessary than ever: at the origin of the European construction, bringing together almost all the European States on the basis of common values and principles and thus natural guardian of “unity within diversity”, offering a common legal space to 835 million Europeans, guaranteeing protection of their human rights, promoting social rights and democracy and contributing to the development of a European civil society, the Council of Europe is today best placed to help meet the challenges raised by growing nationalism and avoid the building of new walls.

5. Alongside the European Union, whose far-reaching integration project will never cover the whole continent, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which also covers non-European States, the Council of Europe, composed of 47 European States, remains the only pan-European organisation capable of promoting and guaranteeing democratic security throughout the continent.

6. In order to preserve and further strengthen this unique pan-European project, currently threatened by divisions and a weakening of member States’ commitment, the Assembly calls for a Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States.

7. In a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last Summit, held in Warsaw in 2005, and at a time when the whole world seems to be changing, a Summit will offer member States a unique opportunity to reaffirm, in the strongest possible terms and at the highest political level, their commitment to the ideal of European unity and the values and principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law upheld by the Council of Europe. Member States should clearly express their willingness to continue to be part of a single community, sharing common values, a common legal order and a common jurisdiction, and capable of capitalising on internal differences.

8. The Fourth Summit should be well-focused and could, inter alia, offer political impetus to:

8.1. enhance the efficiency and authority of the human rights protection system, based on the European Convention on Human Rights, reverse current tendencies undermining the authority of the European Court of Human Rights and improve the record of implementation of its judgments by member States;

8.2. strengthen the treaty system of the European Social Charter, including its collective complaint system and its monitoring machinery (in particular regarding the election of the members of the European Committee of Social Rights by the Assembly), reaffirming the fact that only the enjoyment of socio-economic rights and social inclusion allow people to fully enjoy their political and civil rights;

8.3. encourage member States to adopt effective measures against growing poverty and modern slavery thus reassuring European citizens that the European institutions are not indifferent to their problems and the concrete conditions of their everyday life;

8.4. recognise the valuable contribution of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights to the development of sustainable human rights-centred policies at national and local level throughout the continent, as well as the role played by the Organisation’s standard-setting and monitoring bodies;

8.5. enhance the Council of Europe’s mission both as guardian and innovator of democracy, including by strengthening the role of the Parliamentary Assembly as a strong pillar of European parliamentarism, bringing together representatives of the citizens from almost all European States, and consolidating the role of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) as a constitutional law expert body promoting democracy within and outside Europe’s borders.

9. The Summit should also aim at consolidating citizens’ trust in democratic institutions and democratic values and propose ways to increase citizens’ participation and consultation with civil society in search of common solutions to common problems. It could thus bring the Organisation closer to the people it serves and contribute to the emergence of a European civil society.

10. At a time when the European Union is facing numerous challenges and is also reflecting on the future of Europe, the Summit would offer a fresh and timely opportunity to define, at the highest political level, the role to be played by the Council of Europe in the overall European political architecture. In a Europe of concentric circles, the Heads of State and Government from the 47 member States of the Council of Europe, representing the widest circle, should ensure coherence of standards between the Council of Europe and the European Union, avoid overlapping and best harmonise the various levels of their co-operation, in the foremost interest of European citizens. For this purpose, the Assembly asks the Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States to discuss again the 2006 report “A sole ambition for Europe” and to decide a specific timetable to implement the proposals contained therein in order to remove any overlap between the Council of Europe and the European Union.

11. The Assembly notes that an efficient preparation of the Summit requires the development of synergies between all sectors of the Organisation, co-ordinated by its Secretary General, and more significantly between its two statutory organs. Although the primary responsibility lies with the Committee of Ministers, the Assembly, enhanced by recent reforms, should expect to play an important role in the preparation of the Summit, especially as it has been promoting this idea for several years.

12. In this respect, there is currently an inconsistency in the composition of the two statutory organs: following the illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the application, on these grounds, by the Assembly of sanctions to the Russian parliamentary delegation, for three consecutive years one of the Council of Europe member States, the Russian Federation, has participated in the activities and been represented in the bodies of only one of the two statutory organs of the Organisation, namely the Committee of Ministers, but not of the Assembly. The Assembly regrets that, as a reaction to this situation, the Russian Federation announced, on 30 June 2017, its decision to suspend payment of its contribution to the budget of the Council of Europe for 2017 until full and unconditional restoration of the credentials of the delegation of its Federal Assembly in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

13. The Assembly considers that the overall situation in the Organisation is today counterproductive, particularly as it adversely affects its overall impact as a guardian of human rights and democracy throughout the continent, and therefore it is not in the interest of the citizens of the 47 member States.

14. The Assembly notes that the Statute of the Council of Europe (ETS No. 1), as supplemented by Statutory Resolution (51) 30, provides for synergy between the two statutory organs as regards membership of the Organisation.

15. However, over the years, and in particular after the Organisation’s enlargement during the 90s, the Assembly has developed rules governing the participation and representation rights of members of national delegations in its own activities and bodies which do not provide for any kind of synergy or coherence with the Committee of Ministers.

16. Therefore the Assembly, as part of the preparatory work for the Summit, resolves to initiate a procedure aimed at harmonising, jointly with the Committee of Ministers, the rules governing participation and representation of member States in both statutory organs, while fully respecting the latters’ autonomy. This coherence should strengthen the sense of being part of a community and the obligations incumbent upon every member State.

17. This common reflection could be carried out jointly by the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers within an ad hoc working group set up by the Joint Committee. For this process to be credible and fruitful, the whole Assembly and every single member State should do their utmost to ensure that all member States of the Organisation will be fully represented in the process on both the parliamentary and intergovernmental sides in strict compliance with their respective obligations.

18. In the meantime, and as part of the preparatory work for the Summit, the Assembly resolves to continue its own reflection on its identity, role and mission as a statutory organ of the Council of Europe and a pan-European forum for inter-parliamentary dialogue which aims at having an impact in all Council of Europe member States. This reflection would also enable the Assembly to provide its own vision of the future of the Organisation.

Приетата Препоръка 2113/ 2017 на ПАСЕ към Комитета на Министрите :

Recommendation 2113 (2017) Provisional version

Call for a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and promote democratic security in Europe

1. The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution 2186 (2017) on the call for a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and promote democratic security in Europe, in which it expresses its concern about the numerous challenges currently threatening the European continent and its unity. Against this background, and for the reasons given in its resolution, the Assembly believes that the Council of Europe, and the values it upholds, is today more necessary than ever.

2. In order to preserve and further strengthen the pan-European project in a Europe which has profoundly changed since the last Summit held in Warsaw 12 years ago, the Assembly calls on the Committee of Ministers to convene a Fourth Summit of Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States. This will offer a unique opportunity for member States to reaffirm, in the strongest possible terms and at the highest political level, their commitment to the ideal of European unity and the common values and principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law upheld by the Organisation.

3. The Assembly recommends that the Fourth Summit be well-focused and provide political impetus for a number of specific actions suggested in a non-exhaustive manner in its resolution. It should also offer a fresh and timely opportunity to define, at the highest political level, the role to be played by the Council of Europe in the overall European political architecture and address outstanding challenges in its relations with the European Union, in the light, inter alia, of the 2006 report “A sole ambition for Europe”, in the interest of European citizens.

4. Although the primary responsibility for the organisation of a Summit lies with the Committee of Ministers, the Assembly underlines that an efficient preparation of the Summit requires the development of synergies between all sectors of the Organisation, co-ordinated by its Secretary General, and more significantly between its two statutory organs. The Assembly therefore asks the Committee of Ministers to:

4.1. closely associate the Assembly in the preparation of the draft agenda and draft declaration of the Fourth Summit;

4.2. consider its proposal, as part of the preparatory work for the Summit and for the reasons and according to the modalities described in its resolution, to engage in a procedure aimed at harmonising jointly the rules governing participation, representation and responsibilities of member States in both statutory organs, while fully respecting the latters’ autonomy.

Ms Kyriakides, President of
the Assembly, took the Chair at 3.30 p.m.)

The
PRESIDENT – The sitting is open.

1. Joint debate: Call for
a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and promote
democratic security in Europe, and Defending the acquis of the Council of
Europe: preserving 65 years of successful intergovernmental co-operation

The
PRESIDENT – The first item on the agenda is the joint debate on two reports
from the Political Affairs and Democracy Committee and the Committee on Rules
of Procedure, Immunities and Institutional Affairs. The first is titled “Call
for a Council of Europe Summit to reaffirm European unity and to defend and
promote democratic security in Europe” (Document 14396) presented by Mr
Nicoletti; and the second is titled “Defending the acquis of the Council of
Europe: preserving 65 years of successful intergovernmental co-operation”
(Document 14406) presented by Mr Kox.

We
will aim to finish this item by about 6 p.m. I will interrupt the list of
speakers at about 5.25 p.m. to allow time for the reply and the vote.

I
call Mr Nicoletti, rapporteur, to present the first report. You have 13 minutes
in total, which you may divide between presentation of the report and reply to
the debate.

Mr
NICOLETTI(Italy)*– The report is the culmination of a
long process lasting two years. I thank all the national delegations that have
participated in one way or another. Alongside the report, there are a number of
appendices that contain the documents that various national delegations have
contributed to the process. That is a valuable resource that the Assembly might
want to dip into. I also thank the representatives of governments, the
ambassadors, the non-governmental organisations and the excellent staff here
who have helped me with the report.

Why
do we call for a summit? Because a summit is not something that happens every
year in our Organisation; it is an extraordinary event. Our Assembly felt some
years ago that we were living through extraordinary times that called for
extraordinary responses. Even more so today, we can say that the situation is a
serious one that calls for a serious response.

We
all need to remind ourselves of our shared responsibility for a common European
house. We all have our own political and national histories behind us, but here
in the Assembly we sit in alphabetical order. That reminds us constantly that
we represent not only nations and political families, but a common European
house.

I
certainly feel a huge responsibility for Europe – not just for the Council of
Europe, but for Europe. What other institution in Europe can assume
responsibility for Europe as a whole? We have seen the travails surrounding the
European Union of late: one country is leaving and there are difficulties in
the dialogue between the EU and countries that previously seemed on the point
of acceding to it. I believe that the Council of Europe has to hold high the
European ideal and the historic necessity that is a united Europe. It is not
just a geographic idea; it is a lifestyle based on respect for the dignity of
each and every individual and on respect for the rule of law and democracy.

With
some pride, we stressed in the report the idea of a European ideal. We went
back to the words of Rougemont in 1948, when minds met in the aftermath of the
Second World War. You will find these words at the end of the report: “Europe
is threatened, Europe is divided, and the greatest danger comes from her
divisions.” I have always been struck by those words, written by people who had
suffered totalitarianism and war. As far as they were concerned, the greatest
danger came from a divided Europe: “Europe’s mission is clear. It is to unite
her peoples in accordance with their genius of diversity”. I draw your
attention to that wonderful expression, the “genius of diversity”. We need to
rediscover a taste for our diversity and, within that diversity, to seek unity.

Throughout
Europe, peoples and minorities are suffering because they have been forced into
a mould that wants to make them uniform. We see aspirations towards
self-determination and the unleashing of mad centrifugal forces. If we want to
grapple with all this, we have to ensure that the genius of diversity shines
through so that we may remain different and, at the same time, call for freedom
and respect for the equal dignity of all.

Given
that, we need to ask ourselves whether the Council of Europe can put forward
ideals, drawing on its system of conventions, which is rightly referred to in
the report of my colleague Tiny Kox. What about the internal mechanisms within
the Council of Europe that enable us to speak out, to coexist and to live
together, while at the same time respecting the genius of diversity and holding
high the values of human rights?

In
the past couple of days, we have discussed some important reports, including
that of Mr Liddell-Grainger, which helps us enhance some of our internal
mechanisms. We have found certain weaknesses, for example, in combating
corruption. We live in times of terrorism, poverty, modern slavery, conflicts
and violations of international law, including within our community – we heard
President Poroshenko’s testimony this morning. In response to all that, we have
mechanisms that are sufficiently robust to enable us to face up to difficult
times.

Over
the years, we have found difficulties with liaison or co-ordination in our
Organisation. The various organs of the Council of Europe – the Committee of
Ministers, the Court, the Parliamentary Assembly – have to be autonomous.
Separation of powers is a cardinal principle of the rule of law and we would be
ill advised to tamper with the balance that has been struck.

We
face major challenges, conflicts and violations of our rules. We therefore
cannot afford to proceed in an unco-ordinated way; we need greater
co-ordination between the Council of Europe’s various organs. The Joint
Committee is a statutory body comprising the Committee of Ministers and the
Parliamentary Assembly and there we can engage in a common debate. It is
important to do that rather than bury our heads in the sand, ostrich-like. We
must have the courage to grapple with difficulties. We do not know whether the
debate will take us – the various organs will decide that – but we must have
the courage to conduct that discussion while respecting our different
institutions, and not with a view to lowering the Assembly’s standards. There
have been moments in the history of this institution when the statutory bodies
have been able to get their act together to a greater extent, to co-ordinate
and make important decisions. For example, decisions were made about Greece and
Turkey that were salutary when it came to restoring harmony.

The
draft resolution contains a proposal which calls on heads of State and
government to reiterate their commitment to this Organisation. It also calls on
the Parliamentary Assembly to do all that is required to strengthen its own
internal mechanisms.

The
PRESIDENT– Thank you, Mr Nicoletti. You have just over two and a half minutes
left.

(…)

Earl of DUNDEE(United Kingdom, spokesperson for
the European Conservatives Group)–
I join others in warmly congratulating you, Madam President, on your new
office. I also congratulate Mr Nicoletti and Mr Kox on their very useful
reports. Each calls for a summit to enable certain necessary adjustments so
that the good effects of the Council of Europe since 1949 may further
consolidate and endure.

In
my remarks today I would like brieﬂy to connect three considerations: what the
achievements have been; how much they owe to the wisdom of a far-sighted,
subtle and even paradoxical approach in the ﬁrst place; and why, as stressed by
the rapporteurs, any future adaptations should therefore be made in that
context.

While
in Europe current levels of peace and stability are not least to be attributed
to our respect for human rights and the rule of law, they also reﬂect an
appreciation of how peace, democracy and economic stability best relate to one
another. Since 1949, perception of those aims and their relationship has
altered. Within our own States, improved economic performance remains a
desirable national outcome, but within the Council of Europe, economic
stability is correctly identiﬁed as a means towards a greater end and thus is
subservient to the wider priorities of European peace, the political stability
of countries and the collective wellbeing of communities. Europe’s economy has
benefited enormously from the single market and the EU. Nevertheless, the
extent to which the wider priorities of peace and stability have been served is
the measure of the success of our consensus to ensure that they are served. It
is also the measure of the success of the Council of Europe of 47 States. We
have always urged that those priorities should be advanced within that
affiliation.

These
Council of Europe achievements owe much to the wisdom of the far-sighted,
subtle and paradoxical approach adopted in the ﬁrst place. One such example is
the unprecedented and unique function of the European Court of Human Rights. It
allows a single citizen to take on and if relevant seek legal redress, not only
from other individuals or institutions, but from a European State itself.
However infrequently that may happen is beside the point. What matters is that
the right is acknowledged and protected. That demonstrates a radical change in
attitude in Europe towards the perception of State and citizen and a dramatic
and welcome departure from traditional political theory, which has put the
State before the citizen. Through the Council of Europe and the European Court
of Human Rights, the concept is now entirely different: that as much as
possible State and citizen should be on an equal footing.

There
will clearly always be fresh challenges confronting Europe. That is why regular
summits are necessary and why the rapporteurs are right to call for the next
one to happen soon. Recent new problems to be addressed are the increases in
terrorist attacks, xenophobia, far right-wing parties, corruption and
anti-migrant sentiment and prejudice. As observed by the rapporteurs, there is
also a need for the gaps to be closed between Council of Europe conventions and
their realisation in practice and for the Assembly to review its working
methods and monitoring performance.

For
the attention of the next summit, there are a number of excellent facilitators
with scope for constructive intervention – l will refer to only two examples.
The first is the Venice Commission. I will not elaborate other than to draw
colleagues’ attention to its recent successes in the field of constitutional
reform. The Council of Europe’s Directorate of Democratic Citizenship and
Participation has also played a key role in assisting education about human
rights. There are many opportunities for constructive adaptations. Yet avoiding
imposition they must be implemented through our continuing Council of Europe
consensus of mutual resolve, support and respect.

(…)

Ms GROZDANOVA(Bulgaria)– I would like to convey to you my
satisfaction with today’s debate, which is a continuation of the ideas
expressed in the Sofia declaration of the Assembly from 27 November 2015. In commending the
work of the rapporteur, I appreciate his advisory procedure with the national
delegations in which 31 delegations and several international non-governmental
organisations favoured the idea of the fourth summit. I appreciate particularly
that our rapporteur, Professor Nicoletti, has mentioned and incorporated into
the report my next motion, which raises the issue of the role of the Council of
Europe in the contemporary European political architecture.

I
firmly believe that we should not hesitate to debate the unprecedented problems
that we are facing at this time. It is of primary importance that the fourth
summit confirms the principles of European unity and co-operation. I am
convinced that more than ever the future of Europe is our affair. We must stand
together to avoid the perils threatening Europe’s unity, as the rapporteur so
pointedly mentioned. Facing the problems of the continent, we have to pursue
jointly common policies in order to succeed. United we can be stronger and more
able to achieve our goals.

There
are ongoing discussions at the European and national levels as to whether this
should be a one-speed, two-speed or multi-speed process. First, we have to
reach an agreement after transparent debate and public involvement on what is
the desired destination of the European process. The outcome of this discussion
should not be to pressurise, but to reach out and convince people to accept a
united Europe as their own.

Now
we are witnessing the evolution of several concepts about the goal we want to
reach. Often they contradict one another and create tensions. Should Europe be
an international or a supranational community? And to what extent, and how?
There are tangible differences between the member States from northern Europea
and those from the south, east and west of Europe. We should adapt our common
values through dialogue and mutual understanding, on which the Assembly in 2008
passed Resolution 1640, on the use by Assembly members of their dual
parliamentary role. I am convinced that only then will we avoid tensions within
our European family, and we will be stronger as we face today’s challenges.

There
is no alternative to European unity. It is our destiny, and I dare to believe
that, after the summit, all European citizens will firmly believe it, too.

The PRESIDENT – The next item on the
agenda this afternoon is the communication from the Committee of Ministers to
the Assembly presented by Mr Lubomír Zaorálek, Minister for Foreign Affairs of
the Czech Republic and Chairman of the Committee of Ministers. After his
address Mr Zaorálek will take questions from the floor.

(…)

Ms GROZDANOVA(Bulgaria)– On the same
subject, the Bulgarian national minority in Ukraine is loyal to the Ukrainian
state and legal order, fulfilling the requirements of Article 20 of the
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.

However,
the recently adopted law on education raises concerns among Bulgarians in
Ukraine, and in Bulgaria, too.

Is
the Committee of Ministers committed to assisting Ukraine to ensure that its
law on education conforms to the Council of Europe standards on education in
the mother tongue?

Mr ZAORÁLEK – Thank you for those three questions. I will answer the first
two questions together.

Romania and Bulgaria, like some
other member States, have expressed concern about the Ukrainian language law,
to which Thursday’s emergency debate attests. I will not repeat what I have
just said, except to underline once again that I strongly hope that this matter
will be settled in accordance with the relevant Council of Europe standards. I
trust that the Ukrainian authorities will abide by their commitments, and the
opinion to be prepared by the Venice Commission will assist them in that
respect.

It
is not easy to answer the question on the rise of nationalistic movements in
Europe, and how we work for unity, not division. The rise of extremist movements
in Europe, including nationalistic groups that advocate hatred and violence, is
very worrying, and that such movements are gaining ground on the mainstream
political scene makes it even more worrying. We have to do everything possible
to counteract their narrative in order to convince our citizens that these
parties, and the ideologies they promote, are in no way a solution to our
problems.

As
political leaders, we have a primary responsibility in that respect but, beyond
political circles, we must mobilise all democratic forces in our countries to
combat extremist views and opinions. Civil society organisations can be most
instrumental in that respect. Much has been done within the Council of Europe
over the years to combat racism and intolerance. That work clearly needs to be
continued, and even reinforced, to defend our shared values.